Monday, 7 May 2018

RIP IDA – Windrush & ID cards

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.

"If Verify is the answer, what was the question?"

The Law Commission: "Verify does not currently ensure that the person entering the information
is in fact the person he or she is purporting to be;
rather it focuses on verifying that the person exists" (para.6.67/p.119)

4 May 2018 Windrush scandal: no passport for thousands who moved to Britain. That article and hundreds more like it describe the outrageous Windrush generation problem we have in the UK. Home Office officials are threatening some of these British citizens from overseas with deportation. Some of them have lost their jobs. Some their rented homes. Others have been denied the free state healthcare which they are entitled to.

Many commentators have had the same reaction. If only we had ID cards, these disgraceful injustices could have been avoided. Please see for example:
Politicians and their officials spent eight years in the UK from 2002 to 2010 trying to introduce government-issued ID cards and failing. Nothing daunted, the delusion that ID cards would solve all sorts of problems persists, even though it is perfectly obvious that people who have trouble proving their British citizenship would have the same trouble proving their right to an ID card.

Noticeably, although lots of people's minds turned automatically to ID cards, absolutely no-one's first thought was "this is a job for GOV.UK Verify (RIP), what we all need is a GOV.UK Verify (RIP) account". Whatever the problem, GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is the solution that occurs to no-one.

RIP IDA – Windrush & ID cards

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.
And it's dead.

"If Verify is the answer, what was the question?"

The Law Commission: "Verify does not currently ensure that the person entering the information
is in fact the person he or she is purporting to be;
rather it focuses on verifying that the person exists" (para.6.67/p.119)

4 May 2018 Windrush scandal: no passport for thousands who moved to Britain. That article and hundreds more like it describe the outrageous Windrush generation problem we have in the UK. Home Office officials are threatening some of these British citizens from overseas with deportation. Some of them have lost their jobs. Some their rented homes. Others have been denied the free state healthcare which they are entitled to.

Sunday, 29 April 2018

Digital Transformation at Scale: Why the Strategy Is Delivery

At last Messrs Andrew Greenway, Ben Terrett, Mike Bracken and Tom Loosemore have delivered a book about digital transformation. Yours for £14.99, it's published tomorrow: "This book ... explains how a growing band of reformers in businesses and governments around the world have helped their organisations pivot to this new way of working, and what lessons others can learn from their experience".

The authors are described as "partners in Public Digital Ltd", which isn't a partnership, it's a company, and they're directors, not partners.

"Mike Bracken", it says in the blurb, "was appointed ... the Chief Data Officer in 2014". Actually his appointment was announced in a 24 March 2015 press release, Local authorities setting standards as Open Data Champions.

These little errors may make you wonder about the accuracy of other claims in the blurb, e.g. "the UK’s Government Digital Service ... snipped £4 billion off the government’s technology bill". You would do well to check with the National Audit Office before assuming that that figure is authoritative, there have been problems in the past.

Only last month Mr Bracken was bewailing the failure of digital transformation in the UK government.

That is just the latest in a series of bitter epitaphs. Mr Greenway, for example, has been at it since August 2016: "GDS is following the course charted by other successful [?] centralised reformers in government. Icarus-like soaring for a few years. The occasional flutter of feathers. Then a headlong dive into the timeless, inky depths of the bureaucratic abyss".

And in October 2015 Mr Loosemore advised the world that, far from GDS transforming government, it had merely put lipstick on pigs, a reminder of GDS's failure to deliver their on-line system for payments to farmers.

So who is this "growing band of reformers in businesses and governments around the world [who] have helped their organisations pivot to this new way of working"?

We know who it isn't ...

... we'll have to wait for our copies of the new book to arrive to find out who it is.

----------

Updated 1.5.18

"This title will be released on May 4, 2018". That's what Amazon say. Three long days to wait.

There are some tremendous endorsements of the book. For example Jen Pahlka, Executive Director of Code for America, says "their approach broke open decades of dysfunction and made the public believe in government". She's clearly not talking about the UK, where our dysfunction remains intact.

Lucky Emer Coleman has actually read the book and she's blogged about it:
Books that talk about tech or tech change tend to be (IMHO) a tad well 'technical' but this offering from the Public Digital team is droll and funny in parts like the observation that for good working spaces in digital you don’t need pool tables or martinis or mini fridges. Things on walls, decent computers and stickers will get you most of the way. Or in other words 'The digital revolution can be found in Rymans'.
Droll? Funny? That'll have you in stitches ...

... as long as you know that Rymans is a chain of stationers.

Ms Coleman goes on:
And there are lots more of these useful [?] observations like the fact [?] that 'good digital work is a million silent nods of approval, not one loud round of applause'.
Confucius?

Digital Transformation at Scale: Why the Strategy Is Delivery

At last Messrs Andrew Greenway, Ben Terrett, Mike Bracken and Tom Loosemore have delivered a book about digital transformation. Yours for £14.99, it's published tomorrow: "This book ... explains how a growing band of reformers in businesses and governments around the world have helped their organisations pivot to this new way of working, and what lessons others can learn from their experience".

Wednesday, 18 April 2018

GDS & the banshees 4 – in defence of silos


The system is not set up to do stuff.
It’s set up, frankly,
to have an intellectual pissing match
around how its things should be.


Easter 2018 will be remembered briefly for the epic querulous caterwauling of the banshees when data was taken away from GDS and given to DCMS.

The passionate tweet alongside was emitted in response to a 29 March 2018 announcement on the machinery of government by the Prime Minister: "This written statement confirms that the data policy and governance functions of the Government Digital Service (GDS) will transfer from the Cabinet Office to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). The transfer includes responsibility for data sharing (including coordination of Part 5 of the Digital Economy Act 2017), data ethics, open data and data governance".

No surprises there:
  • The Department for Culture Media and Sport changed its name to "The Department for Digital Culture Media and Sport" back in July 2017.
  • 18 months before that, in December 2015, DCMS issued a consultation document on the UK's digital economy making it clear that it was in their remit and not GDS's.
Nine months before that, in March 2015, there was a real surprise when GDS acquired responsibility for data in some unspecified way but they didn't do anything with this responsibility and their attempt in May 2016 to produce an ethical framework for data science confirmed that they had nothing to offer.

Nevertheless, in solidarity with Mr Bracken, Stephen Foreshew-Cain dutifully feigned indignation at the loss of power to DCMS, please see the tweet alongside.

You should know that Mr Foreshew-Cain took over as Executive Director of GDS in September 2015, replacing Mr Bracken. Also, that he only lasted 10 months, after which he was replaced by Kevin Cunnington, ...

... who has remained silent on the DCMS issue, no public wailing from him, no gnashing of teeth and not a single garment has been rended (rent?).

No such restraint from Mr Bracken. He was back on banshee duty on 4 April 2018 in the New Statesman magazine: "To elicit government-wide institutional reforms in a digital age, one needs three levers – digital, data and technology – to be in one place aligned to the financial levers of government ...To take data policy out of the centre and move it without mandate or clear explanation to a weak departments with no track record of delivery or cross-Whitehall power ... doesn’t make sense ... Last weekend, the UK seems to have made government a little bit slower, more siloed, harder to reform and more complex. Without a clear statement of motivation, you have to ask: what is the user need?".

It all sounds quite plausible at first but you have to ask how does Mr Bracken know that digital, data and technology have to be in one place, that's a rule he's just made up, suppose he's wrong. They were in one place in GDS and nothing was happening. After no time at all the argument starts to degenerate into what he himself refers to as "an intellectual pissing match". GDS has a poor track record of delivery and suffers from much-diminished cross-Whitehall power. And its claims to be driven only by user needs do not stand up.

Sometimes these banshees spoil it by wailing just a bit too much. Take a look at "last weekend, the UK seems to have made government a little bit slower, more siloed, harder to reform and more complex". Whitehall departments as currently established are "silos", in his language, and Mr Bracken doesn't like silos.

Nor does Mr Foreshew-Cain as we discovered two years ago, please see the tweet alongside.

The suggestion is that a collection of reactionary old permanent secretaries sit around Whitehall defending the entrenched entitlement of their departments against all-comers, standing in the way of internet era progress offered to them by the enlightened likes of Messrs Bracken and Foreshew-Cain.

Well that won't wash, will it – "one needs three levers – digital, data and technology – to be in one place" is exactly what you'd expect a selfish and benighted silo-defender to say, followed by the threat that change would make "government a little bit slower, ... harder to reform and more complex".

The comparison isn't exact. The long gone Messrs Bracken and Foreshew-Cain never were permanent secretaries and and they don't have the decades of public service behind them that normally go with the job. But the petulant cry from the sidelines that disruption is all very well for other departments but keep your hands off GDS sounds pretty authentically reactionary. Some silos are more equal than others?


Silos in Acatlán, Hidalgo, Mexico.

----------

Updated 12.6.18

Major government initiatives are announced on television, on the radio and in the national newspapers and periodicals. There are people who remember when they were even announced on the floor of the House of Commons.

Minor matters like medical reports on the latest ailments of the Government Digital Service (GDS) used to merit a press release. There was a time when GDS would write endless self-congratulatory blog posts and carpet bomb Twitter with their awesome news.

Long gone now. The GDS blog posts have all but stopped. Their Twitter timeline is like one of those ghost towns in cowboy films – tumbleweed, a hyena or two, and the odd crazed old gap-toothed prospector.

Last March saw the nadir of this PR curve, with news being whispered to a few selected journalists in the margins of a conference, please see above.

Except that now the nadir has sunk even lower, with the briefing involving apparently just one single journalist, Bryan Glick, the editor of Computer Weekly magazine. GDS loses digital identity policy to DCMS, he told us yesterday, 11 June 2018: "The Government Digital Service (GDS) has lost responsibility for digital identity policy, with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) taking over".

An 1861 painting of Mary Celeste
(named Amazon at the time),
by an unknown artist
Apparently "GDS will still be developing Gov.uk Verify [RIP], its in-house digital identity assurance system, but wider policy now rests with Matt Hancock, secretary of state at DCMS. The move took place last month, without any public announcement, but was revealed by Hancock during a press briefing last week".

Mr Glick is the only journalist known to have reported this move. Was he the only journalist at the press briefing? That's what it looks like.

All the hot air has escaped. The party's over ...

... and all that's left of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is a wrinkly old dusty bit of a deflated balloon while GDS comes to resemble nothing more than the Mary Celeste.

GDS & the banshees 4 – in defence of silos


The system is not set up to do stuff.
It’s set up, frankly,
to have an intellectual pissing match
around how its things should be.


Easter 2018 will be remembered briefly for the epic querulous caterwauling of the banshees when data was taken away from GDS and given to DCMS.

The passionate tweet alongside was emitted in response to a 29 March 2018 announcement on the machinery of government by the Prime Minister: "This written statement confirms that the data policy and governance functions of the Government Digital Service (GDS) will transfer from the Cabinet Office to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). The transfer includes responsibility for data sharing (including coordination of Part 5 of the Digital Economy Act 2017), data ethics, open data and data governance".

No surprises there:
  • The Department for Culture Media and Sport changed its name to "The Department for Digital Culture Media and Sport" back in July 2017.
  • 18 months before that, in December 2015, DCMS issued a consultation document on the UK's digital economy making it clear that it was in their remit and not GDS's.

Friday, 23 February 2018

Thursday, 18 January 2018

Making a difference

We volunteer because we want to make a difference - HMRC digital
The difference maker
We’re delivering reform – and starting to make a difference
Design that Makes a Difference exhibition
Teachers dedicated to making a difference

That's the first five hits returned by a Google search just now for "making a difference". We could go on. For some time. There are about 1,775 more hits where those five came from.

That's if you restrict your search to just UK government blogs, blog.gov.uk. Extend the search to the whole gov.uk domain, and Google gets 6.72 million hits. The civil service is clearly fascinated by making a difference.

Take the brake off, search across all domains, and Google offers you 320 million articles to read.

Making a difference is a big subject.

Too big to tackle in its entirety.

Let's restrict our scope to just the UK Government Digital Service (GDS). They have spotted the making-a-difference fashion and adopted it for their endless and compulsive recruitment drive:


The examples could be multiplied. There's this – We're looking for an inspiring Service Manager: "We want someone who is as committed to transformation as we are, and in return we will offer a friendly, supportive working environment full of people who want to make a difference". And there's the Ross Ferguson tweet alongside. You will have no problem finding further examples.

Is it really such a good idea for GDS to market themselves on the basis that they make a difference?

Catching flu makes a difference to millions of people and presumably GDS don't want to suggest that they're a debilitating virus but that possibility is not excluded from their glib marketing.

Does the flap of a butterfly’s wings in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas? Any event must have a cause. That's how we think. Rightly or wrongly. Every action of ours must have an effect. Trivially, it follows that it is impossible not to make a difference. What is the non-trivial point that GDS are trying to make?

Presumably GDS want you to understand that they know what they're doing, they know what difference it is that they are trying to bring about, they're not just a Brazilian butterfly unwittingly bringing destruction to Texas. But what is it that they know? How do they know it? And why don't they tell us?

When President Clinton demanded back in 1992 that mortgages be made available to everyone he caused the credit crunch of 2007/2008. What is there to protect GDS from the law of unintended consequences? Nothing.

The public sector ethos is an appealing idea. The suggestion is that public servants are uniquely altruistic and motivated only by increasing the public good. Piffle. Anyone working in the private sector, whether or not they are inspiring and talented and committed and passionate, could do more good and/or less harm than a GDSer. That's a hypothesis. What is GDS's counter-argument? How do GDS measure the public good? They don't say.

GDS hold themselves out as being bathed in the glow of making a difference. But making a difference is an empty claim without a lot of supporting definition and evidence and argument. Potential recruits are recommended to ask at interview what this difference is that GDS claim to have made in the past and promise to make in the future.

Making a difference

We volunteer because we want to make a difference - HMRC digital
The difference maker
We’re delivering reform – and starting to make a difference
Design that Makes a Difference exhibition
Teachers dedicated to making a difference

That's the first five hits returned by a Google search just now for "making a difference". We could go on. For some time. There are about 1,775 more hits where those five came from.

That's if you restrict your search to just UK government blogs, blog.gov.uk. Extend the search to the whole gov.uk domain, and Google gets 6.72 million hits. The civil service is clearly fascinated by making a difference.

Take the brake off, search across all domains, and Google offers you 320 million articles to read.

Making a difference is a big subject.

Too big to tackle in its entirety.